[GB] Mega Man IV - "Dr. Wily Stage" by LeviR.star

[Zeta]

Submission Information:
Series: Mega Man
Game: Mega Man IV
Console: Game Boy
Title: Dr. Wily Stage
Instrumentation Solo Piano
Arranger: LeviR.star

[attachment deleted by admin]

[LeviR.star]

Decided to revisit an old sheet back from February of 2017. I feel better about some changes I made to polish it up, but the accidentals (like they usually are for me) were a nightmare here. I tried my best, but they're likely wrong in several spots.

[WaluigiTime64]

This is a really underrated piece. Nice arrangement too.

In M.19-20, there's a transition from F# to B, which is similar to the transposed interval in M.23-24. However, you've written the B chord as having a diminished 4th (B+Eb) instead of a major third (B+D#). You probably made this mistake because of the key signature having Eb, but yeah everything in M.20 is supposed to follow the key of B (so turn everything into a sharp, except for the B naturals and F natural). You did it right in M.24 so you can compare to that.

I'm not sure how correct it is to put all of these sharps in anyway, given the flat-based key signature. It's possible to go Gm-Gb-Cb-Dbm-C-F-??? though personally I find it kinda gross (particularly the Dbm). Someone else may say otherwise though.
Also I'm not 100% on those accidentals in the last two measures (except the very last D chord, which is definitely correct).

For the intro bit you've written the RH as switching clefs a bunch, when you could put the RH line on the top layer of the LH staff for M.1+3 instead (considering they're playing fourths together), so it's easier to tell the intervals when it switches. Having all those clef changes is a bit confusing to read when it's actually fairly simple.

Other than that, I think it's a good arrangement.

[LeviR.star]

This is a really underrated piece. Nice arrangement too.

In M.19-20, there's a transition from F# to B, which is similar to the transposed interval in M.23-24. However, you've written the B chord as having a diminished 4th (B+Eb) instead of a major third (B+D#). You probably made this mistake because of the key signature having Eb, but yeah everything in M.20 is supposed to follow the key of B (so turn everything into a sharp, except for the B naturals and F natural). You did it right in M.24 so you can compare to that.

I'm not sure how correct it is to put all of these sharps in anyway, given the flat-based key signature. It's possible to go Gm-Gb-Cb-Dbm-C-F-??? though personally I find it kinda gross (particularly the Dbm). Someone else may say otherwise though.
Also I'm not 100% on those accidentals in the last two measures (except the very last D chord, which is definitely correct).

For the intro bit you've written the RH as switching clefs a bunch, when you could put the RH line on the top layer of the LH staff for M.1+3 instead (considering they're playing fourths together), so it's easier to tell the intervals when it switches. Having all those clef changes is a bit confusing to read when it's actually fairly simple.

Other than that, I think it's a good arrangement.

Thanks, Waluigi, I implemented those changes. Also, thinking back to Top Man Stage, I put some accents in on the last measure.

Am I really bad with accidentals, or do I get an excuse for this song?

[WaluigiTime64]

Thanks, Waluigi, I implemented those changes. Also, thinking back to Top Man Stage, I put some accents in on the last measure.

Cool, though you forgot to make the Eb's into D#'s (in both the LH and RH).

Am I really bad with accidentals, or do I get an excuse for this song?

It's... probably just this piece being very weird.

[LeviR.star]

Cool, though you forgot to make the Eb's into D#'s (in both the LH and RH).

Shoot, I guess I only fixed half of that, sorry. Fixed again.

[Libera]

Right, notes look good and visually nothing's standing out to me formatting-wise; let's talk about accidentals.

Everything up to bar 19 looks good to me.
Bars 19-24: So as Wah pointed out (thanks by the way!) we can do this in two ways: Gm -> Gb -> Cb -> Dbm -> C -> F or Gm -> F# -> B -> C#m -> C -> F.  Either way we've got to be consistent.  The way I see it, Gm -> F# is a change of 8 accidentals (2 flats to 6 sharps) whereas as Gm -> Gb is a change of only four accidentals (2 flats to 6 flats) so I, myself, would go with the first option.  At the moment you're going with the second option, but you're using Fns and Ebs in bar 20 (should be E#s and D#s) (and also there's a Fn in the second to last semiquaver of bar 19.)
The last two bars:
Bar 25: So here we've got a whole tone scale in bar 25 with the middle note just being the fifth in between the two octaves and the way we write this should probably preserve that fact.
You cannot view this attachment.
This is how I've always seen whole tone scales written on their own (and since there's nothing else going on at the same time we have full freedom to write this in the clearest possible way) and this also preserves the intervals between notes in each 'chord'.
Bar 26: With the final bar the last chord is definitely correctly spelt (as Wah mentioned).  The previous two could alternatively be written as Abs and Ebs.  What would the benefit be?  Well the relationship them and the last chord doesn't really matter since it's a tritone so either way we spell it is equally valid (although if we're being really nitpicky it's probably better to not alter the fifth of Gm as we are doing at the moment), so the only real thing is to consider how it relates to the final chord of bar 25.  Writing it with Abs would give it a different degree to the previous notes which gives a nicer stepwise motion (and also is less accidentals).

Yeah that last point was probably a bit confusing; basically I'm just suggesting change the G#s and D#s to Abs and Ebs in the final bar.

Anyway, as I said, aside from the accidentals this looks pretty good.

[LeviR.star]

Right, notes look good and visually nothing's standing out to me formatting-wise; let's talk about accidentals.

Everything up to bar 19 looks good to me.
Bars 19-24: So as Wah pointed out (thanks by the way!) we can do this in two ways: Gm -> Gb -> Cb -> Dbm -> C -> F or Gm -> F# -> B -> C#m -> C -> F.  Either way we've got to be consistent.  The way I see it, Gm -> F# is a change of 8 accidentals (2 flats to 6 sharps) whereas as Gm -> Gb is a change of only four accidentals (2 flats to 6 flats) so I, myself, would go with the first option.  At the moment you're going with the second option, but you're using Fns and Ebs in bar 20 (should be E#s and D#s) (and also there's a Fn in the second to last semiquaver of bar 19.)
The last two bars:
Bar 25: So here we've got a whole tone scale in bar 25 with the middle note just being the fifth in between the two octaves and the way we write this should probably preserve that fact.
You cannot view this attachment.
This is how I've always seen whole tone scales written on their own (and since there's nothing else going on at the same time we have full freedom to write this in the clearest possible way) and this also preserves the intervals between notes in each 'chord'.
Bar 26: With the final bar the last chord is definitely correctly spelt (as Wah mentioned).  The previous two could alternatively be written as Abs and Ebs.  What would the benefit be?  Well the relationship them and the last chord doesn't really matter since it's a tritone so either way we spell it is equally valid (although if we're being really nitpicky it's probably better to not alter the fifth of Gm as we are doing at the moment), so the only real thing is to consider how it relates to the final chord of bar 25.  Writing it with Abs would give it a different degree to the previous notes which gives a nicer stepwise motion (and also is less accidentals).

Yeah that last point was probably a bit confusing; basically I'm just suggesting change the G#s and D#s to Abs and Ebs in the final bar.

Anyway, as I said, aside from the accidentals this looks pretty good.

Thanks for the accidental help; files are fixed.

[Libera]

No problem, I'm always happy to help.

Looks good!

[LeviR.star]

Hey, do I need a couple of those wavy cross-stave slurs for m. 19 & 23?

[Libera]

Hmm, they could definitely work there (and might give the intent more clearly.)  If you'd prefer not to have them though that's fine.  You could always try it out, see if you like it and then update the files if you do.

[LeviR.star]

Hmm, they could definitely work there (and might give the intent more clearly.)  If you'd prefer not to have them though that's fine.  You could always try it out, see if you like it and then update the files if you do.

Ok, I fiddled with the slurs. I shouldn't have to attach the slur to the first note of the succeeding measure, should I? It kinda bends it more than I want it to.

[Libera]

Updated the files with fancy new slurs as per Levi's request.

[Brassman388]

Margin on the right side of the page in the pdf is incredibly small.

[LeviR.star]

Margin on the right side of the page in the pdf is incredibly small.

Don't know what happened there, but I fixed it.